fxmo 


Duke  University  Libraries 

Reply  of  S.  Tea 
Conf  Pam  12mo  #939 


REPLY  OE  S.  TEACKLE  AYALLIF,  ESQ., 


LETTEB  OF  HON.  JOHN  SHERMAN 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  OFFICERS  OF  THE  FIRST  MARYLAND   INFANTRY. 


Camp  First  Maryland  Infvntrv,  ) 
,      •  April  Otfi,  186*.      S 

The  officers  of  the  First  Maryland  Regiment  have  adopted  the  form 
of  this  publication  to  give  as  extended  a  circulation  as  possible  to  the 
following  letter,  addressed  by  S.  Teackle  Wallis,  Esq.,  of  Baltimore 
city,  to  John  Sherman,  of  Ohio.  The  length  of  the  letter  hap*pre- 
clude'd  its  publication  by  the  press,  whose  columns  are  necessarily 
filled  with  die  mom  en  to  6s  events  now  transpiring.  The  present 
course  is,  therefore,  adopted  to  give  circulation  to  the  letter  of  Mr. 
Wallis.  The  attentive  perusal  of  the  public  is  earnestly  invoked,  not 
only  because  the  letter  will  amply  repay  the  re  dcr  who  merely  seeks 
an  intellectual  return  for  the  time  thus  spent,  but  more  especially  that 
it-set-*  forth,  in  a  lucid  and  unanswerable  manner,  the  true  position 
a  -d  by  tl  j'  Rights  party  in  Maryland,  at  the  time  when 

her  legislative  proceedings  were  rudely  terminated  by  the  arbitrary 
and  tyrannical  arrest  and  imprisonmen;  of  the  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature, and  because  it  shows  the  heroic  spirit  which  actuated  and  sup- 
:  them  in  their  trials,  and  which  disdained  any  compromise  of 
principle  to  obtain  a  freedom  which  they  accepted  as  their  uncondi- 
tional   right:  •  •    , 

Baltimore;  January  3d,  1863. 
Hon.  John  Shermik,  U.  S.  Senator: 

Sir  :  I  received  on  Sun-day,  December  28th,  the  letter  bearing  date 
the  2Grh,  which  you  addressed  to  me  in  professed  reply  to  mine  of 
the  12th..  1  find  it  also  in  the  New  York  Times  of  December  3 1st, 
with. an  editorial  notice,  from  which  1  infer  that  it  was  forwarded  to 
that  journal  at  least  as  soon  as  it  was  transmitted  to  me.  My  own' 
letter  would  not  have  been  handed  to  the  eWorld"  for  publication,  had 
not  the  the  lapse* of  a  week,  without  even  an  acknowledgment  of  its 
receipt,  given  me  reason  to  suppose  that  you  intended  to  be  discour- 


tcotis  as  well  as  unjust.  The  tenor  of  your  reply,  as  you  have  at  last 
fumished*it,  does  nothing  to  relieve  me  of  that  impression,  it  being 
obviously  intended  for  a  party  pamphlet,  ad  rdptavdum,  instead  of  an 
answer,  in  good  faith,  to  the  8 object  upon  which  1  addressed  you. 

You  have  entirely  misapprehended  the  purpose  of  my  letter  of -the 
12th,  if  you  really  suppose,  as  you  profess  to  do,  thai  [  desired  or 
attempted  to  convince  yon  of  my  own  "loyalty,"  or  that  of  the  lie- 
gislature  of  Maryland,  to  which  I  had  the  honor  to  belong  in  I86VL 

.  I  do  not  mean  to  be  uncivil,  when  I  assure  vou  that  nothing  was 
farther  from  my  ihoughts,  and  that  there  are  few  things  to  which  I 
could  be  possibly  more-  indifferent,  personally,  than  the  judgment 
.  which  gentlemen  who  bear  y,our  relation  to  the  governing  party  in 
the  United  United  States  may  choose  to  form,  in  r  gard  to  myself,  my 
opinions,  or  my  action  Still  less  would  1  venture  to  deal  so  disre-. 
spectfully  with  the  General  Assembly  of  Maryland,  as  to  recognize  in 

•    ycu  or  your  partisan  associates,  any  right  or  fitness  to  pass  author i 
tative   judgment  upon  them  or  their  official  conduct. 

As  I  understand  the' form  of  government  under  which  the  people  of 
this  country  have,  until  within  the  last  two  years,  supposed  them- 
selves to  live,  no  citizen  is  criminally    amenable  for  his  public  or  pri- 

:te* conduct,  except  to  the  laws  of  the  land   as  administered- by  the, 
. constituted   judicial  tribunals.     "* No  opinion,''  you,  yourself,  admit) 
"  is  criminal   under  Our  law,"  and'I  think  I  may  assflme — whether 

t  you  admit  it,  or  not — that  there  are  no  acts,  for  which  any  citizen 
can  be  lawfully  held  to  account,  except  those  which  the  law  has  for- 
bidden.'  No  officer  of  the  government,  whether  civil  or  military,  has 
any  more  right — as  I  have  been  taught — to  create  offences;  or -define 
them,  except  oalyas  the  lav;  prescribes,  than  he  has  to  reb  *r  murder 
on  the  highway,  or  proclaim  himself  king  or  sultan.  It,  is  of  the 
essence  of  con  ial  government — in  peace  or  wat,  as  has  always 

heretofore  been  understood — that  the  Constitution  and,  laws  should  be 
masters,  and  public  officers,  like  private  individual^  only  their  ser- 
vants. Beyond  the  lines  of  their  strict  constitutional  powers,  such 
officers 'are  as  literally  without  authority,  before  the  law,  as  the  hum- 
blest citizen;  for  they  are,  in  fact,  privat;  wrong-doers,  and  not  public 
officers  from  the  moment  that  they  have  tran  i    those  constitu- 

tional limits.- 

Gentlemen  of  your  way  thinking,  however,  have  adjudged  these 
rudimental  and  long  established  principles  to  be  v. holly  obsolete,  under 
the  sort  of  government  which  you  need,  and  have  set  up,  to  serve 
your  purpo.-es.  You  have  accordingly  bonowed,  from  -the  vocabulary 
of  despotism,  the  name  of  "disloyalty,"  to  designate  that. undefined 
and  undefinable  offence — not  known  to  free  institutions,' but  which 
you  have  seen  fit,  in  the  plenitude  of  your  prerogatives,  *o' create — 
which  consists  in  .questioning  the  wisdom,  canvassing  the  policy7, 
doubting  the  integrity,  or,  if  need  be,  resisting  the  corruptions. and 
usurpations  of  those  who  temporarily  lipid  and  p  'ostitute  power. 
With  like  propriety»and  consistency  you  have  adopted  the  catch-word 
of  "  loyalty,"  to  indicate  the  equally  undefinable  public  virtues  and 
cxcellendes  which  you  would   have  it",  believed   that  yourselves 'and 


-      3 

jour   partisans   embody  and  mono  Knowing  no    lt loyal  x 

myself,  in  my  i  elation  to  ihe   Federal     :  t  that    obe-" 

dience  vrl;     h      •:•■-'.  as  a  citizen,  to  the  '      -        .  in,  I 

an  i       ,  u ally  expounded  and  ad  .  at  ilia:  I  am 

as  free  as  i  can   be,  from   the  Blig!      •'  .ou  or  ; 

■   any   one  else,  I      •'  I- -j;il '" 

your    fa 

the  Unite. 1  Sta  $cept   id     "  i    to  the   ; 

my  State  r  of  the  F  scl- 

eral  go*  ■':■-  aei  ■:.  or  to  the   laws  e        itutiona  I  undei  that 

ild  probably  feel  myself  h  times     u'of 

ten.  i ■ .  1  to   eon  ■  •  •  ."     A*  to  the 

more  :  of  the  rebutte,  which 

ins  ;.h»t  you  "fail 

iinpres 

to  i 
if  ,1  c.  fth  the  gravity  a 

to  express  it  * 

■'     "  •'--  n   '    ' 

more    I  —with    g  n   or  j 

"  obe  ort;  and  I  cann  ;  ■-- 

pecta-,  .v  part,  to  th  |         imp* 

tuous   I  f  the    hallucination,  •  en -of  ; 

political  •  ion,  at  this  time,  seen      i  labor,  set        m-g 

-  up,  above  the  law  and  i.  ■   an  I  ( 

tipnei  itizens  and  [t  i  / 

idea —  tleiueri,  at  a  ■    >  j 

i  correct  lent  o 

ject  to  it    .  ered  in 

a  son  oi  not 

cnti  led  to   >;•.  li  :ati©n,  unless  it  first  n     »  )$    p  I  **  loj 

is  of  km  to  the  oilier  doc;.  t    •  t  '•  .      ila 

But  another  and  a  very  satigfa                       .  p 

yourself,  tvhty    i    was.  especially  oa            ibout                                        \ 

referred  to.  ifoi 

of  yo  i  i  your  rel  i-alto                        i . 

re~<d..  iViUon,  o!                          -.                           -  i 

of  the  Mr.   Lincoln.  .  i'    i    ..                          in  I 
ter,  a- 

proved  ni  — for,  ob              .                                    y 

approve  ►  i" — nut    tl  ■.          a   co 

Wilsu.i.  ■■...■  ("strictly  lv                                               -             ) 

delegat  '.,■•- 

pus.    3  r                         ;                i 

C  ;;.-  (he  plain  meaning  ■■ ,          i  '■  ■              "                         e 

mud  ii  ■      .                  yohicli  Hit  \ 

"Stiii.  i  te  Way,  "fiiere  are  ti 

cer  !:.  .  .                       u    of  Congress*;  but,                                 -y 

assumed t  I  of  a  '  hill   of  iin      *       i    r.                  U  vt  iridem- 


nity.'  The  President  merely  assumed  this  hazard,  r.nd,  in  the  vacancy 
of  Congress,  wisely  assumed  a  power  not  delegated  to  him  by  the  Consti- 
tution i" 

When  a  Senator  of  the  United  States,  bound  by  his  official  oath  to 
support  the  Constitution,  can  bring  himself  to  declare  that  he  cordi- 
ally "  approves  and  justifies,",  in  his  official  place, -the  action  of  the 
President  in  assuming  "  a  power  not  delegated  to  him  by  the  Consti.- 
tution" — in  other  words,  that  he  approves  and  justifies  a  sheer  admit- 
ted usurpation  and  violation  of  the  constitutional  rights  of  the  citizen, 
by  the  Chief  Executive  of  the  country — ^who,  outside- of  the  Consti- 
tution, is  nothing,  and  who  has  solemnly  sworn"  to  preserve,  protect 
and  defend-5  tkat  Constitution,  "to  the  best  of  his  ability,"  and  is 
hound  by  its  paramount  provisions  to  "  take  care  that  the  laws  be  faith- 

.  fully  executed" — I  must  be  allowed  to  entertain  my  own  opinion  as  to 
the  fitness  of  such  a  Senator,  to  understand  or  appreciate  his  own  ro- 
lat^on,  or  that  of  any  other  person,  to  a  constitutional  government. 

You  will  permit  me  to  add.  that  "when  you  addressed  me  the  first 
paragraph  of  the  letter  before  me,  and  after  dwelling  upon  your  ven- 
eration, "  as  a  student  of  the  common  law,"  for  "  the  right  of  per- 
sonal liberty,"  you  informed  me  that  you  regarded  it  "  as  never  to  be 
affected  except  for  crime,  or  in  the  case  provided  by  the  Constitution, 
when  the  public  safety  is  jeoparded 'by  rebellion  or  invasion,"  but  ad- 
ded that  you  thought  the  arrest  and  imprisonment  of  myself  and  my 
colleagues  "  within  this  rule,"  you  must    have    lost  sight  of  the  doc^ 

„ trine  of  the  letter  from  which  I  have  just  quoted.  It  is  difficult  'or  a 
man,  whose  ideas  are  not  stimulated  by  the  atmosphere  of  '"loyalty" 
in. which  you  move,  to  understand  how  you  can  regard  our  arrest  and 

•  imprisonment  as  "  within  this  rule"  of  the  (Constitution,  when  you 
know  that  we  were  arrested,  by  Executive  mandate  alone,  without  any 
previous  authority  given  by  Congress  to  suspend  "  the  right  of  per- 
sonal liberty,"  and  when  you,  yourself,  have  expressly  declared  that 
by  "  the  plain  meaning  of  .the  Constitution  Congress  alone,"  not  the 
President,  "  must  determine  the  cases  in  which  the.  public  safety  requires 
its  suspension."  Surely  you  do  not  ask  us  to  believe  that  when  you 
used  this  language,  in  1861,  and"  refused  to  join  Mr.  Wilson  in  saying 
that  the  suspension  of  the  habeas  corpus  by  die  President  was  '*  strictly 
jegal  or  within  his  delegated  powers" — you  meant  to  imply,  or  enter- 
tained, the  opinion  now  suggested  in  your  letter  of  December  :26th, 
that  Congress,  by  the  mere  act  of  authorising  the  President  "  to  use 
military  power  to  suppress  tho-  rebellion,"  ipso  facto  suspended  the 
habeas  corpus,  and  rendered  "  rigidly  legal  and  in  the  forms  of  law"  the 
arrest  of  any  and  every  citizen,  without  oath  or  warrant,  whenever 
and  wherever  the  President  in  his  discretion  might  see -fit.,  Yet,  un- 
less you  do  mean  thus  to  tax  the  credulity  of  the  public,  I  do  not  see 
what  escape  there  is  left  to  you,  from  a  discrepancy  which  is  not  re- 
putable in  either  a  lawyer  or  a  Senator. 

But  I  ceased*  to  be  surprised  at  your  thifs  relying  upon  the  forget- 
fulness  or  ignorance  of  your  'readers,  when  1  turn  to  the  quotation 
from  the  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court, *as  delivered  by  Chief  Justice- 
*faney  in  the  case  of  Luther  vs.  Borden,    (7  Howard.    45,)  to  which 


you  carefully  Omit  a  particular  reference,  but  which  you  cite  as  au- 
thority for  the  monstrous  proposition,  that  the  President  of  the  Unit  :d 
States  and  the  military  officers  under  him.  are  clothed — by  the  mere 
pendency  of  a  civil  war  recognized   by  Congress — -with  tb  !    rity 

to  arrest  citizens  and  search  houses  all  over  the  country,  withott  pro- 
cess cf  law,    whenever  in  their    judgment   there  may    be  reasona 
ground  for  doing  so.     No  one  knows  better  than  yourself,  that  in  I 
opinion  from  which  you  made  the  quotation  in  question,  the  ChiefcTiwv 

*  tice  was  speaking — as  the  Court  was  passing  judgment — concerning  a 
case  in  which  the  military  right  to  make  arrests  and  searches  was  re- 
cognized as  arising,  not  l'rcm  an  implied 'Executive  prerogative,  grow-  ^ 
ing  out  of  the  mere  pendency  of  hostilities,  hut  from  a  sj  .  ;s- 
lative  act  of  the  State  of  Rhode  Island,  by  which  martial  law  was  ex- 
pressly and  specially  declared,  and  from  which  alone  the  Governor 
and  his  military  subordinates  derived  all  the  authority  which  they 
pretended    to    exercise  •  or   the    court  pretended  to  ascribe    to   them 

in    the    premises.     It   would,  not    at   best   have    been   very  creditar 

•  ble  to  you  as  a  professional  man,  to  insist — even  if  yo.u  had  not 
concealed  the  material  facts  of  the  oase— "-that  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  had  in  effect  .  U  the  pror< 
ative  which  you  claim  for  the  President  in  th<  au- 
thority from  Congress — merely  because  they  had  recognized  it  in  the 
Governor  of  Rhode  Island  under  the  express  authority  of  the  Leg 
lature  of  the  State.  You  could,  with  difficulty,  lo<  k  a  Court  of  Jus- 
tice in  the  face  and  argue,  upon  §uch  a  foundation,  that  a  ion 
of  war  or  a  recognition  by  Congress  of  a  war  or  insurrection  as  ex- 
isting; is  ipso  facto,  a' proclamation  of  martial  law  over  the  leng'h  and 
breadth  of  the  republic.  And  yet  sue  -ition,  and  you 
have  kept  back  the  facts  which  would. have  .•unprofessional 
readers  to  discover,  as  all  your  r  .  how  reck- 
less your  statement  is,  that  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  Ui  "  ktcs 
have  given  it  their  .sanction  in  tht  :'  Rhode  I  si  h  .d.  \  ■  h  :■ 
as  carefully  kept  back  the  other  fact,  equally  fre\\  known  to  }♦"•,•  that 
in  the  memorable  hob  as  corpus  case   of  Morryman,    the  Chief  • 

of  the  United  States,    to  whom  you   would    0  and 

despotic  doctrine  y.  k  with  C  !  em- 

phatic directness    and  solemnity — inter}'  • 

tween  its  operation  and  ■  :y  of  th ^    citi  the  farce  of  his. 

great  intellect,  the  fulness  of  his  learning  and  wisdom,  the  pu, 
dignity  of  his  character,  and  the  authority — alas  !  helpless — of  hjs 
venerable*  age  and  elevated  office.  •  Happily  you  cannot  keep  back  the 
palpable  and  overwhelming  fact,  that  popular  opinion — adduced  or 
frjghtened  for  a  while  from  its  propriety- — has  already  trampled,  in  its 
reaction,  upon  the  fallacies  and  fictions  with  which  corrupt  politicians 
and  venal  lawyers  had  sought  to  circumvent  the  intelligence  of  the 
people,  while  usurpation  laid  its  hand  upon  their  rights.  .  Other3  are 
aware,  if  you  yourself  arc  forgetful  of  the  fact,  that  as  Senator  from 
Ohio,  you  no  longer  represent  the  feelings  or  opinions  of 'the  people 
of  your  State,  and  that  this  result  is'chiefly.due.to  their  indignant  re- 
pudiation of  the  arbitrary  and  anti-republican  doctrines,  of  which  you 
a,re  still  one  of  the  lino-erins  defenders. 


The  st  rtling  cb&racter  of  the  (egal  heresies  which  yon  Rayo"  pro- 
ved and  the  extreme  disinj  enuoa'sness  of  the  mo  e  in  which- yoii 
have  presented  their.,   haa   led   the,   for  public  reasons,  to  entfer  much 
further  into  the  discussion  of  them  than  I  had  Wished,  for  I  personally 
feel  asiittle  interest  in  your  inconsistencies- as  I  do  in  your  opinions. 
My  letter  of  the  l^th  December  wsfcs  addressed  to    you  concernting  a 
ttar  of  fact  arid  not   a  matter  of  doctrine.     You    wefo  reported  in 
e   newspapers  as  hayfrig  used  the  language  which  I  quoted    in  that 
letter  concern  L»gt|ie  members    f  the  Maryland  Le  e,  who  were 

rested  and   confinSdvwith  me    by  the  order  of  Mr.  Lincoln  or  Mr. 
Sfeward,  taking  your  report  tge  in  connection  with  the  expli- 

cit statement  made,  last  spring,  by   Mr.    Hiektnan,   in  the  Housed 
entativels,  upon  the  aH  dged   authority    of  I  sidfnt,   and 

;'h  the  language  used  by  Mr.  Fessen.den,    in  the  S  n-ate,  a  few  days 
after  your  observations  were   mad* — all  of  which  I  rei    ti  I  fco  in  my 
tter— I  understood,   and  had  a  right  to  regard  fch<   a'hole  of  you  as 
aking  the  charge,  that  the  Legislature  of  Maryland.       -       its  raern- 
b<       .  fire  arrested,  Ibad  g^kciScally  in  contemplation  th<  passage  of  .an 
•  dinance  of  secession.     J  understood  Mr.  Fesdein  further  say* 

ing  that  the  President  had  "evidence"  of  such  intention  I  took  it 
for  o-ranted  that  you  believed  your  statement  tn  be  true  when  you 
made  it,  arid  I  addressed  you,  in  perfect  good  faith,  simply  to  let  you 
•  know  that  it  was  not  true  and  to  appeal  to  your  candor  to  correct  it. 
r  •  a  1 1  that  you  would  be  glad  to  do  so,  but  at  all  events  I   felt  i.t 

ilhe  to  n/yself  and  my  colleagues,  and  to  tha  truth,  jiot  to  leave  un- 
idicted  a  mis-tftatettferit,  to  which  your  official  po  i?ion  and  tho 
frefluent  reiteration*  of  the  same  story.,  in  Cong  ess,  plight  give  im- 
portance arid,  credit;  if  it  were  not  denied.  If  it  had  been  a  mere  ex- 
pression of  year  opinion  feouoerning  the  merits  Or  demerits  of  my  col- 
leagues arid  myself.  I  should  certainly  hare  said  nothing  ab'out  it.    ; 

iliuiev  the  circumstances"   your  proper  and   natural  course  was  a 

very  plain  bue  one'.      If  yon   had  not   assorted   the  fact   which  I  sup- 

;  assorted,  you    !  ad  but   to  say  so  an$  there  was  an 

end  of  iha  matter.  .  If*yo.u  'had  asserted  it  and   had   the   means  of 

p      -ing  it  to  be  true,  70a  could  have  refused  to  alter  your  statement, 

,vo  .  •    I uced  yottl^  evidence, W  declined-' .doing so,  in  your  dis-', 

.-•'-•'  in.     If    you   had  asserted    it  and  were  unable  to   maintain    it, 

-     co^ld  have  wi  I  n  tha  assertion,  or  have  let  it  stand. according 

dis]        iots  of  indisposition  tjO' be  just.     You  have  done  none 

,o  thing?.      You  deny,  that  you   made  the  statement  of  which  I 

-.  and  th(      reproach  me  for  having   merely  replied  to  what 

voii  Were  reported  aa   saying,  instead  of  anticipating  and  answering 

what  you  were  not  reported  afc  saying  in  the  newspapers  which  T  read, 

what,  therefore,  1  had  never  seen      After  warn  eriiig  at  this  and 

ddering  at  tlie  absence  of  all  ••avowal   of  loyal  obedience, '  in  my 

letter,  yen  proceed  to  argue  that  my  whole  communication  was  based 

u.  a  technicality.     It  .was  ■     -technical  denial."   you  say — which 

ybri  explain  .to  signify  that  I  took   issue  with  you  upon  the   isolated 

ge   of  our  "havisg   intended   to   pass  an    ordinance  of  secession. 

Such  an  ordinance,  you  tell  me,  'would  have  been  "but-  one   form  of 


arraying  the  State  of  Maryland  agaiast-the  Unite!  States,"  and  I  have 
confined  myself  to  a  denial  of-  our  having  contempi  it  "form," 

instead  of  defending  the  Legislature  against  th  i  and  substan- 

tial charge  of  having  intended,  in  some  form  or  o;  .  defy  tli3 

United  States,  and  resist  its  authority/'  I  believe  I  state-  rour  point 
fairly  and  clearly.  Having  made  it,  you  dedicate  the  remainder  of 
your  letter  to  a  promiscuous  assault  upon  the  J .  lice  Com- 

missioners .of  Baltimore,  the  proceedings  of  the  generally, 

and  my  own  course.and  declarations,  with  upon  the 

history  of  the  excitements  in  Baltimore  on  and  after  the  I9tn  of  April, 
1861.  From  all  of  these  things  you  draw  and  assert  the  conclusion 
that  we  weref  alHawfnlly  and  justifiably  arrc  \u>A— 

whether  we  intended  or  did  not  intend  tO«pass;the  c  I  o(  seces- 

sion, which  was  the  exclusive  topic  of  m\  letter. 

Now,  I  do  not  know  how  all  this-may  'strike  the  mass  of  the  paiti- 
I  the  Times,  and  for  whom  you  wrote  your  letter,  but  it 
is  to  me  that  the  class  for*  whom  a  Senator   of  t 
it  to  write,  will   see,  at  a  glance,  that  it  is  a  mere  ev  :-.  in  antf  a 
clap-trap.     Who  was  it  that  raiaod  and  framed  .  the  in- 

tention of  the  Legislature  of  Maryland,   to  pass  an  ordinance  of  se- 
Noi  1.  certainly,  but  Mr.   Lincoln,  and  Mr.  Hickflan,  and 
Mr.  I  n.  and   your  I  saw  your  speech  rep   rted.      You 

were  the  accusing  parties.      You  had   the   ^eviden^c  m— -or 

you  ought  to  have  had— when  you  attempted  to  j  -.-rage 

h  had  been  inflictejj  upon  us.     You  £ra 
in  order  to  escape  the  just  reproach  of  making  loose  an  1  random  and 
indefinite  accusations,   and  of  hav  ng  deprived  men  of  their   liberty 
w  thout  specific  and  ascertained  cause  therefor,  you  i,  among 

you,  and  agreed  upon  the  charge  that  we  had  throw  our 

State  out  of  th  Unioh  by  adopting  a  secession  ordinance.  Yen  put  that 
fact  forward,  of  your  own  choice,  as  the  burden  of  our  guiltj  and  the 
c#rner-st$>nc  of  your  justification.  The  President  of  the  United 
States,  speaking  through  Mr.  Hickman,  not  only  made  tj  isation 

in  words,  but  with  his  usual  graceful  playfulness,  when  '  arest 

s  are  in  question,  had  his,  «t  "the  pock  •    whiohthe 

"resolutions  of  secession"  were  to  have  been  carri.-  I  I  •  lerick. 

The  government  newspapers,  in  Baltimore  an  ;  ,  teemed, 

at  the  time  of.our  arrest  and  afterwards,  with  stories  about  the  mys- 
terious "  ordinance/'  The  rufiians  who  were  sent  by  the  Secretary  of 
State  to  our  dwellings,  at  midnight,  to  seize  upon  our  correspondence 
and  rifle  our  desks  and  safes,   spoke,  openly,  in   the  ;'  the 

inmates  of  our  house,  concerning  the  existence  of  such  an  ordinance 
in  the  possession  of  some  of  us,  and  of  their  instructions  to  search 
for  it.  In  my  own  case,  they  were  for  six  or  seven  hours  in  pursuit 
of  it,  with  all  the  ingenuity  and  the  appliances  of  mare  respectable 
burglars      Produce,  or  get  the  President  to  p  oduce.  all  ,7  papers 

connected  with  our  arrest,  and  I  w%!l  almost  be  willing  to  stake  my  w\oh 
case  on  the  fact,  th  t  they  wiU  be  found  to  specif/  our  .intention  to  pass  such 
an  ordnance,  as  the  precise  offence  creating  the  necessity  for  tie  suppression 
of  the  Legislature.     In  more  than   one  of  the  public  journals,  it  was 


mentioned — and  repeated  long  afterwards  at  the  North,  when  I  was  in 
Fort  Warren — that  an  '-ordinance,"  supposed  to  be  in  my  handwri- 
ting, had  actually   been    delivered   to  the    Secretary   of  State,    whiose  • 
delight  at  the  possession  of  such  a  treasure  was,  one  day,  rudely  put 
an  end  to,  by  the  discovery  that  it   was  a  forgery — the   work,  as  was 
stated,  of  some  "loyal"  clerk  in  his  office,  \Chom  I  had  once;  prose- 
cuted.for  a  former  crime.     I  do  not  know  that  the  story  was  false  for 
it  was  not- officially  promulgated,  nor  do  I  know  that  it  was  true.   I  refer 
to  it,  and  to  the  other  circumstances  which  I  have  mentioned,  for  the 
purpose  of  showing  that  when' an  intended  ordinance  o*f  secession  was 
set  up  as  our  offence,  and  as  the  justification  for  our  arrest,  the  pur- 
pose of  the  government  was   specifically    to  fix   upon    us  that  specific 
"treasonable  purpose.".    I  had  no  reason  or  right  tot  believe  that.,  in- 
stead of  meaning  what  they  said,  and  what   they  charged,  the  Presi- 
dent and  his  defenders  meant  something  else,  and  not  what  they  said 
and  charged.     Iliad  no  right  or  reason  to  suppose  that  a  general,  in-» 
definite,  treasonable  mind  and  purpose,* not  concentrated  in  any  par- 
ticular act,  was  all  that  was  meant  to  be  ascribed  to  us,  and  that  when 
I  denied  the  specific  and  oft  repented  accusation,   upon   which  all   of 
you  agreed,  I  should  be  told  that  it  was  a  "  technical  denial,"  and  that 
I  ought  ?o  have  entered  upon  a  defence   of  the   Police   authorities   of  • 
Baltimore,  the  difficulties  on  and  after  the  19th  of  April,  and  the  pro- 
ceedings, at  large,  of  the  Legislature.     If  I  had  done  so,  would  you 
not  have  been  the  first  to  say  that  I  ,had'  guiltily  evaded  the  real  and 
vital  question  ?   .  If  I,  or  some  other  person  interested,  had  not  denied 
that  we  intended  to  pass  the  ordinance  in  controversy,  would  you  no" 
have  assumed,  and  have  claimed   the   right  to  assume,   that   such  an 
intention  was  justly  ascribed  to  us  ?     And  if,  after  gentlemen  of  high 
position,  like  the  President  and  members  of  Congress,  have  themselves 
deliberately  selected  and  framed   and   tendered  an   issue  of  fact,  they 
call  the  denial  of  it  a  technicality,  as  you   do,  what  reason  have  I  to 
assume  that  they  will  not  again  do  same  thing  ?     What  grourfds  have*[ 
for,believing  that  you  mean  to  stand  by  the  fresh  statement,  in  your 
letter,  of  what  you  call  facts,  any  more  than  by  the  other  alleged  fact 
•of  the  ordinance  of  secession*  by   which    you   now  refuse   to   stand?. 
Would  I  have  any  security,. after  showing  the  untruth  and  futility  of 
them   aU,  that  you   would   not -say  I  hal   written  a  series  of  "tech- 
nical denials"  to  isolated  facts,  and  that  the  broad  fact  of  my  general 
"disloyalty,"  or  that  of  some  of  my  friends  and  acquaintances,  was 
all  that  y  u  had  intended    o  charge  ? 

There  is  no  arguing,  permit  me  to«say,  with  gentlemen  wTho  adopt 
that  style  of  reasoning.  You  furnish  more  than  one  striking  illustra- 
tion of  its  vices  in  the  very  case  before  us.  You  would  have  it,  for 
instance,  that  it  made  no  difference  to  the  President,  and  mikes  ncno 
in  the  argument,  whether  the  Legislature  of  Maryland  was  about  to 
pass  an  ordinance  itself,  or  to  call  a  Convention  which  might  do  the 
same  thing.  The"  one  intention,  if  you  are  to  be  credited,  would  have 
been  as  good  a  justification  as' the  other,  for  the  arrest  of  the  Legis- 
lature*. You.  can  hardly  mean  this,  although  you  s^y  it.  Any  ordi- 
nary, person  who  did  not  desire  to  arrest  for  the  mere  sake  of  arrest- 


ing,  would  suppose,  that  when  the  purpose  of  tl;o  President  was  to 
prevent,  by  summary  arrests,  the  passage  of  an  ordinance  of  secession, 
he  would  arrest  only  those  who  intended  to  pass  it,  and  that  instead 
of  arresting  the  Legislature  for  intending  to  call  a  Convention,  he 
would  not' e-ven  arrest  the  members  of  the  Convention  its.  If,  unti]  he 
had  reasonable  certainty  that  they  intended  to  do  the  act  which  he 
feared.  Certainly  it  ill  becomes  you  to, assert  that  the  intention  of 
calling  a  Convention  would  have  been  a  "  treasonable  and  disloyal 
purpose,"*  when  the  "  entire  .insignificance"  which  your  com 
ascribes  to  the'  Legislature,  and  the  "distinguished  loyalty'"  with 
which  it  clothes  the  people  of  Maryland,  must  render  it  quite  certain, 
in  your  judgment,  tliat  a  Convention,  if  called,  would  lave 
triumphantly  overturned  the  Legislature  and  her.    But 

the  point  is  not  worth   pursuing  farther.      Your  reply,  1  r<  peat,  is  an 
evasion  and  nt)t  a  maintenance  of  your  position.     My  denial  was 
•a  "  technical  denial,"  but  a  denial  as  substantial  as  the  deliberate  and 
intentional  charge  which  it  repelled. 

It  is  no  part'  of  my  purpose  to  follow  you  through  the  long  axnr 
allegations   and   insinuations,  outside   of  the   only  quesl  ween 

"  which  ycu  endeavor  to  bolster  up  the  justice  of  -the  proceedings 
which  for  so   long   deprived   the  Major  and    Police    Cos;;:  ra  of 

Baltimore  and  the  members  of  the  State  Legislature  oi'  their  HI 
I  have  no  means  whatever  of  access  to  the  correspondence  which  you 
say  "  is   in   the  hands  of  the  Ggvernjnent   offioers,"  and   upon  which 
you  found   your  principal    impeachment   of 'the   fidelity  of  the  police 
authorities.     I   cannot  tell   to  what   extent  it  exists,  or •  what  i 
authenticity.     "But  having  as  a  member  of  the  Legislature,  examined- 
and  fully  approved  their  course,  1  know  enough  of  it,  to  justify  me  in 
declaring  that  the  statements   in    regard   to. them,  of  which  you  have 
allowed  your  letter  to  be  fhe  vehicle  to  the  public,  are  partial,  garbled 
and  unjust,  and  frequently  untrue.      I  willingly  persuade  myself 
you  have  been  deceived  into  promulgating  them,  for  I  fancy  that  I  can 
see  in  them  the  work  of  hands  wtrich  are  not  yours,  but  which  p  irate 
ointments  and  malice,  and  local  interests  and.haire  1  have  made 
the  perpetual  bearers   of   falsehood  and  malignant  counsels   to   the 
Executive  chamber,  during   the  whole  long  agony  of  this   wretched 
war.     If  you  had  reflected,  for   an  instant,  it  seems  to  me  that  you 
would  not  have  permitted  yourself  to  enter  upon  a  crusade,  under  such 
guidance. 

ft  is  now  nearly  eighteen  months  since  the  Baltimore  Commissioners 
of  Police,  then  prisoners  illegally  confined  at  Fort  Mc Henry,  pre- 
sented their  respectful  memorial  to  the  two  Houses  of  Congr 
They  protested  their  innocence  of  any  offence  against  the  laws  of  the 
country;  insisted  upon  their  right  to  be  informed  of  the  accusations 
against  them  ;  invited  scruti'ny  into  their  whole  conduct,  private  and 
official,  aud  asserted  "their  readiness  to  meet,  without  a  moment's  delay,. 
any'charge  which  might  be  responsibly  laid  against  their  individual  or 
official  proceedings."  Suggesting  their  inability  to  obtain  redress, 
pending  the  suspension  of  the  Habeas  corpus  in  Maryland,  they  respect- 
fully and  earnestly  invoked  the  immediate  interposition  of  Congicss 


In  tlteir  behalf."  That  memorial  was  treated  wii.li  open  indignity  anu- 
contempt.  From  the  moment  cf  its  presentation,  down  to  this  hour, 
neither  the  Sen'atg,  of  which  you  are  a  member,  nor  theiower  House, 
has  given  any  heed  to  they*  complaints,  or  taken  one  step  towards  the 
vindication  of  their  rights  or  of  public  liberty  or  justice  m- their  bc- 
halfr  You  hive  not  given  them  the  accusations  against  them  (if  any) 
or  the-  names \bi  their  accusers.  You  have  not  afforded  them  an 
opportunity  of  even  proving  their  innocence,  much,  less  have  you 
allowed  them  a  public  hearing  or  trial,  either  before  a  congressional 
committee  or  the  constituted  judicial  tribunals.  *  Grand  jury  after 
grand  jury.  selected  by  a  Marshal  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  appointment,,  (to 
say  nothing  of  the  grand  juriBs  of  the  State.)  has  met  since  they  were. 
taken  from  their  homes  in  July,  186J.  At  least-one  Federal  grand  jury 
has  deliberately  investigated  the  whole  proceedings  which  you  have  dis- 
cussed in  youi-  letter,  with  all  the  evidence  in  the  possessipn  of  the  gov- 
ernment before  it — including,  of  course,  everything  to  which  you  have 
had  access,  in  order  to  prepare  the  defence  of  the  government  which 
you  have  published.  Yet  no,  bill  of  indictment  has  been  found,  or 
could  be  procured  to  be  found.  The  House  of  Representatives,  cer- 
tainly— and  perhaps  the  Senate,  also^ — called  upon  the  President  to 
state  the  grounds  upon  which  the  gentlemen  in  question  were  arrested 
and  imprisoned,  but  the  President  refused  the  information,  as'"  incom- 
patible with  the  public  interests."  You  were  all  satisfied  with  that 
refusal,  and  there  jou  and  those  wdio  think  and  side  with  you— repre- 
sentatives of  a  people  calling  itself  free,  and  boasting  yourselves  the 
special  apostles  of  freedom— -allowed  the  case  of  your  oppressed  and 
helpless  fellow-citizens  to  rest,  unheard,  unconsidered — scorned. 
There  was  not/a»man  of  you  who  could  rise -above  the  level  of  political 
and  sectional  vindu-tiveness  to  an  act  of  simple  common  justice,  much 
less  to  vindicate  a  great  principle,  or  to  strike  an  honest  blow  for 
pfiblic  and  private  freedom.  *  You  allowed  the  victims, to  languish,  fojc 
nearly  a  year  and  a  half,  in  prison  after  prison,  to  which  they  wrere 
dragged — you  emancipating. negroes  the  while,  hy  the  thousand,  ae 
the  President  now  is,  by  the  million. 

And  no,w  that  the  prisons  have  been  opened,  and  the  prisoners  in 
question  released  without  condition — not  willingly,  but  because  pub- 
lic opinion  had  demanded  it.  at  the  ballot-box,  and  the  gathering  stor-m 
of  public  retribution  was  too  portentous  to  be  longer  disregarded — 
you,  a  Senator^  who  have  aided  in  doing  all  this  injury,  are  not 
ashamed  gratuitously  to  attack,  at  an  unfair  advantage,,  through  the 
columns  of  a  newspaper,  the  men  whom  you  have  so  long' Refused  to 
charge,  or  hear,  or  try,  publicly,  feiirly,  openly,  and  where  they  could 
meet  their  'accusers  face  td  face,  according  to  their  rights  and  your 
obligations.  You  consent  to^gather  'up,  from  "  the  hands  of  Govern- 
ment officers  "  and  local  informers  for  publication  against  them,' ex  parte 
statements  and  apocryphal  scraps  to  the  sources  and  originals  of 
which  they  have,  no  access  for  challenge  or  disproof,  ami  under  pre- 
text of  replying  to  a  letter  from  me,  upon  a  different  subject,  which' 
you  evade,  you  thus  .seek  to  cover  the  retreat  and  the  shame  of  the 
government  and  your  own  dereliction  of  duty.     Do  you  think  this  is 


ii    •        •       1 

worthy  of  you,  as  a  gentleman  or  a  Senator  l    Do  jou  think  it  hon- 
orable—-nay,  even  decent — in  the  Executive,  ornis'subordinates,  irre- 
sponsibly  to  furriisb   to  you,  in  such  a  way  ant  for  speh  purj) 
what  Mr.'  Li:  r  it  would  be  ';  incompatible  with  the 

public  interests  :'  to  disclose  to  you,  as  a  member  of  th  be,  to 

be  used  legitimately  and  responsibly,  for  public'- ends",  in  your  official 
plac    and  sphere  ?  If  the  incompat  he  pretended  has  now 

ceased  to  exist,  why  does  he  not  respond  to  the  requisition  of  ( 

•omes  hint  instead  of  privately  retailing  his  "  evidence  ,:  to 
for  the  pages  of  a  party  journal  ?  If  the  President  and  his  Secre- 
taries of  State  and  V,  a-r  are  really  able  to  establi  -4*  the 
policeauthorities,  which  you  have  set  lip  for  them,  why  have  they  not 
done  i  no  g'rand  j.ury  been  able  to  find  an  indictment  against 
the  alleged  criminals?  If  there  are  letters,  and  minutes,  and  tele- 
grams of  tfcCfi  parti  •.  in  question,  which  "would  condemn  them,  as 
pretend,  and  of  which  the.  President  and  hi-  have  control, 
why  arc  they  not  produced,  o-penly  and  upon  official  i 
fore  some  tribunal  honest  and  feai !  ss  enough  todi  ag  out  the  whole  truth 
and  brjng*thc  accused,  or  the  a  icusers,  \«i  shame  and  justice  I  You 
know  very  well  that  the  Mayor  of  Baltimore,  and  Messrs.  Howard  and 
Gatchell,  two  of.  the  police  commissioners,  during  the  whole  of  their  long 
imprisonment,  denounced  and  defied  t^e  al  itrarj  p<  wer  and  conduct  of 
tho  Govern  •  le.manding  their  release  a  e.  and  refgisir 
purchase  il  shadow  of  a  concession.  You  know  that  they  were 
at  last  discharged  without  yi  he  ninth  part  of  a  hair.  Ho 
you  think  Mr.  Seward  and  Mr.  Stanton  arc  magnanimous  and  be- 
ilent  persons,  likely  to  iy  to  such  contumacy,  where 
they  have  only  to  produce  Bgaiast  the  recusants,  from  the  jjles  of  their 
detective  office^,  conclusive  evidtnee  of  treason  !  Is  there  one  word 
you  have  said,  in  your  long  letter,  to  demonstrate  th               e  of  the 

th,  i!  true,  would  not  make  it  as  rig 
the  sworn  ami  b'ounden  duty  of  Mr.   Lin  i   his  thi 

yours,  to  retain  them  in-custody  still,  for  trial 

State  the  thing  as  you  may,  -sir.  i:  is  not  a  thing  for  either  you  or 
the   Executive  to  be  proud  of.     Your  mode  of  dealing  with  the  guilt' 
oi*  innocence  of  men  and  their  liberty,  is  i  t  vari  istitu- 

tions.  the  habits,  the  very  instincts  of  a  free  people,  whose  love  of 
justice   and   lair  piny,  and,  let  me  add,  b — -lias   not  yet   been 

entirely  debauched  away   by  their  repVeseutativ  s  or  rulers.      I  will 
not  do  the  injured   men  in  question  the  wrong,  nT>r  public   sentiment, 
the  outrage,  nor  myself  the  discredit,  of  submitting  theii  i  your 

arbitrament,  or' to  trial  upon  your  newspaper  impeachment.  I  assert 
now,  as  a  matter  within  my  own  knowledge,  that  when,  as  one  of  the 
counsel  of  the  police  cc  s,  I  visited  General  Banks  with  my 

colleagues,  on  the  very  day  when  ihe  arrest  was  made.  General  Banks, 
who  had  ma  ;o  it,  •assured  us,  explicitly,  that  there  was  no  .'charge 
against  our  clients,  impeaching  their  integrity  in  any  way,  and  that 
they  had  been  arrested  chiefly  as  a  measure  of  precaution'.  1  state, 
further,  from  my  personal  knowledge  also,  that  on  the  Cub  of  April, 
1861,  when  I  accompanied  the  Mayor  6i this  city  to  Washington, 


12 

where  he  bad  been  invited  by  Mr.  Lincoln  for  consultation,  the 
President  himself,  in  the  presence  of  his  whole  Cabinet  and  of  Lieu- 
tenant General    Scott,  as  well  as  of  tny  companions  and  myself,  more 

'  than  once  volunteered  to  declare  that  he  had  carefully  investigated 
the  conductof  the  police  authorities  of  Baltimore  on  the  19th  'of 
April,  and  was  entirely  satisfied  that  they  had\lischarged  their  duty 
with  good  faith,  and  to  the  best- of  their  ability.  No  member  of  the 
Cabinet  ventured  to  gainsay  the.  judgment  of  the  President,  although 
the  Mayor,  with  pei feet  frankness,  informed  them  that  in  conjunction 
with  Governor  I  licks,  the  Police  board,  of  which  he  was  a  member, 
had  ordered  the  destruction  of  the  bridges — that  "  warlike  operation," 
which  you  denounce  as  treason  in  the  concrete.  As  the  name  of  Lx- 
Governor  Hicks  has  been  recently  added  to  the  lists  of  patriots  and 
statesmen  who  adorn  the  Senate  on  the  •'loyal"  side,  his  certificate 
upon  the  question  may  perhaps- weigh  somewhat  in  your  judgment. 
If  Vii'u  will  tarn  to. his  date  Excellency's  message  to  the  Legislature 

*  of  Maryland,  on  the  25th  of  April,  lS,61,*you  will  find  him  declaring 
that  "  the  Mayor  and.  Police  Board  gave  to  the  Massachusetts  soldiers 
(on  the  i9t'h)  all  the  protection  they  could  afford,  acting  with  the 
utmost  promptness  and  bravery."  I  trust  that  after  reading  it,  you 
may  modify  to  some  extent  the  lawyer-like  proposition  of  your  letter, 
that  it  wai  an  overt  act  of  treason  for  the  Legislature  qf  Maryland  to 
pass  the  act  for  the  protection  of  the  police  authorities,  which,  you 
declare  to  have  "  outlawed  the  United  States  and  their  soldiers'," 
That  statute  did  not  pretend  to  impair  private  rights  or  remedies,  as 
the  indemnity  law  recently  passed  by  the  House  of  Representatives, 
in  Mr.  Lincoln's  behalf,  so  unblushingly  and  absurdly  does.  Surely 
you.  do  not  mean  to  .intimate  it,  as ■  your  opinion  that  ,Mr.  Lincoln's 
indemnity  act  "outlaws"  noi  only  the  thousands  who  have  been  his 
victims,  but  the  whole  of  the  citizens. of  the  States  over  whom  he  has 
brandished  the  sword  of  martial  law.  If  you  c>o,  I  trust  that  the 
country  will  hear  from  you  in  the  Senate,  and  not  through  the- Times. 
But  I  have  dwelt  too  long  on  this  branch  of  the  subject".  I  under- 
take to  promise  yo'u,  in  leaving  it,  that  whenever  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  on  his  own  responsibility,  will  give  to  the  late  poiiee 
authorities  of  Baltimore  an  op'portunity  of  Confronting  their  accusers, 
of  being  heard  and  judged  as  free  men  may  submit  to  be,  without 
surrendering  their  rights  and  self  respect,  they  will  vindicate  their 
con  kur  from  every  jrf.ist  reproach,  to  the  satisfaction  of  all  whose  good 
opinion  is  worth  having*  If  you  doubt  what  I  say,  you  have  only  to 
have   the  experiment   made.     I  think  I  may  add  that  the  gentlemen 

•named  will- manage  to  find  for  themselves  a  way  of  bringing  the  mat- 
ter before  some  legitimate  tribunal,  -where  some,  at  least,  of  those  who 
have  been  engaged  in  '.:  outlawing  "  thein,  will  have  an  opportunity  of 
ascertaining  how  far  the  justification  .you  have  set  up  is  well-founded, 
in  fact  or  law. 

I  pass,  now,  to  your  assault  upon  the  Maryland  Legislature,  con- 
cerning which  and  its  proceedings,  as  challenged  by  you,  I'propose  to 
enter  into  but  little  discussion.  It  is  due,  however,  to  my  colleague 
from  Baltimore  and  to  myself,  that  I  should  deny,  in  the  most  unquali- 


1'3 

£ed  manner,  the  truth  of  the  statement  whiclvyou  make,  that  our 
election  was  but  a  "  fprm,"  and  that  we  were  chosen  only  because  "  no 
one  dared  to  oppose  the  armed  rebellion,  headed  by  the  police  commis- 
sioners." Among  all  the  wholesale  fictions  with  which  you  have  been 
furnished  by  your  collaborators  here,  there  is  not  one  more  profli 
than  this.  1  assert  what  no  man  of  veracity  will  deny  here — under 
his  own  signature  and  alleging  fact  in  verification  of  his  denial — that 
from  the  time  of  the  inauguration  of  the  board' of  polioe  of  Baltimore 
in  the  spring  of  1860,  down  to  the  hour  of  its  suppression  by  mili 
force,  in  the  summer  of  1861, the  freedom  of -the  ballot  box  an  I  f 
access  to  it  was  as  sacredly  and  perfectly  guarded  and  maintained  for 
all  citizens,  of  all  parties  and  Opinions,- as  ever  under  any  system  I 
or  could  be  possible.  I  challenge  the  production  of  any  ch  trge.to  the 
contrary,  from  the  worst  partisan  or  the  most  corrupt  pi\  rig  us, 

until  after  the  suppression  of  the  board  had   rei.dered  slander  i 
sary  to  vindicate  usurpation.     I  assert,  and  am  read*  to  prove,  when- 
ever a  single  fact  to  the  contrary  is  alleged,  that   th 
securing  a  fvco  and  fair  ehectii  n  on  the  &4th  of  April,  1861,  wei 
ample  and  in  as  good  faith  as  ever  before,  and  thai  no  man  in  the  whole 
community — not  even  the   most  rabid  and   obnoxious    and   unwoivhy 
par titan — would  have  met  with  the  slightest  obstacle  in  voting  for  any 
candidates  whom  he  might  have  preferred       indeed  1  challenge  proof 
to  the  contrary,  when  I  further  assert,  that,  daring   the  whole  of  the 
excitement  which  occupied  and  followed  the  1 9th  of  April,  the  b 
of  police  extended  to  every  citizen  cf  Baltimore  th  i  nple  and 

efficient  pro'cetiori  in  person  and  property,  and  that  security  in 
was  actually  had   by  all  amid  the  heats  of  the  st-iife  which   occurred, 
and  was  impending,  to  an  extent   which   puts  to  shame  the  contempo- 
raneous  condition  of  the  large   cities  of  the  North.      Ypu  m 
or   disbelieve   this,  honestly,  I   admit.      1  at    it   is   true   riev 
You  have  no  right  to  doubt  it  because  it  was  officially  u  by 

the  mayor  and  city  council,  in  their  memorial  to  Co-ngrei  »,  in  t8Gl, 
and  by  the  board  of  police  in  theirs,  and  an  investigation  of  its  1 
was  respectfully  and  earnestly  besought  at  your  hand-.  <  you  re- 

fused.    But  I  do  not  wonder  at  your  d  mbting  it.  amid  t! 
press  of  falsehoods  with  which  your  partisans,  here   and    elsev 
have  overwhelmed   the   history  of  those  times,  during   the    , 
ment  and  absence,  and  the  enforced  silence,  of  those  whom   you 
all   joined    in    endeavoring  to   crush  for  their  opinions.      That  : 
persons,  apprehending    further   military  collision,  left  the   city  with 
their    families*   for  the   time,  is    undoubtedly    true.       That    others, 
who  probably  ■  are  your  special  ihforrjaents,  ran    incontinently   away, 
in    shtfer  fright,  when  there    was  not    the  .slightest   danger   to  them 
or  theirs,  is  equally  true,  and  it  is  quite  natural- that  these  lasjfc  al 
magnify  the  dangers  before  whichtheir  own  heroism  quailed.      But  that' 
any  man,  of  any  party,  who  asked  protection  from  the  police,  had  any 
difficulty  in  obtaining  it,  or  that  any   citizen  of   Baltimore  had  any 
real  reason  for  seekiug  personal   saTety  in   flight,  is  wholly    unl 
Least  of  all,  as  I  have  sail,  is  there  any  ground  for  intimating  a  ques- 
tion as  to  tso  perfect  freedom  of  the  ballot-box  on  the  2(lth  of   April. 


u 

The  vo'e  was  small,  because  there  was  but  one  ticket  in  the  field  ;  and 
although  I  was  a  member  of  the  delegation  elected,  1  will  not  allow; 
false  i  to  prevent  me  from  saying,  that  I  believe  it  was  person- 

ally unexceptionable  to  the  great  mass  of  the  people.     It  was  com- 

I,  for  the  most  part,  of  men  of  business,  who  wove  not  profes- 
sional pbliti  ;ions  and  who  were  known  to  be  men  of  character, intel- 
ligence, and  moderation  in  their  \iews.  To  many  of  them,  the  accep- 
tance of  such  a  place  was  well  known  to  be  a  Ba<  rifice.  To  myself  it 
Was  a  serious  one,  which  only  a  serfse  of  duty  as  a  citizen  prevented 
me  from  refusing  uritey.'.     Of  the  delegation,  the  majority  ha4 

been  prominent  members  of  the. old  Whig  party — some  of   them,  at 

time,  active  members  of  the  American  party  1  believe  that  we 
should  have  been  fairly  and  easily  elected,  by   an  pi  ■  u  ing  ma- 

jority, over  any.  oppo.^ition  that  might  have   been    presented;  audi 
know  that  if    tljere  i  ad  been  any   opposition,  it  would   inve  found  the 
lot-box  as   free   as^ws.,  found  it,  and  .would  h-  irly   d  ah 

with,  by  rhe  police  authorities  and  ourselves.  If  you  really, believe 
that  w     never  ented   more   tlnyi  nine  tjaousaud    voters  out   of 

thirty  thousand  in  the  city  ;  that  the  rest  of  the  3  of"  distin- 

guished loyal t  f  ;    that  pur  Support  grew  smaller  ■  ■■  ,  from,  day 

to  day,  afterwards,  and  that  we  were  actually  frighti  6m  our  in- 

tent".' res  of  treason,  by  the  "thre  .(  of  expulsion" 

on  the  part  of  "the  loyal  people"  of  the  town  — to   say 

nothing  of  the  ■•;  menaceof  resistance     from  B .  1    —I  shonld  be 

ed  to  know  in  what  consisted   the  danger  wfa  incoln,  or 

any  one  else,  had  a  right  to  apprehend  from  us.      '••'■.  xt  or  ex- 

cuse had  he  for  arresting  us,  when,  in  addition  to   :  ;  security 

and  our  "entire  insignificance,"  he  had  armed  | 

•.and  had  pve.inor  to  aid  him  in  disarmiii  -nts  ? 

You  entire!  rid — you  certainly  '«misjrep'i  it  he  state 

of  things  in  Baltimore  on  ■and    imnfedi#tej;v aft<         '  April, 

It    Wi  of    comparative   unanimil 

opinion  —  noi  a  reign  of  terrori     The  facts  have  b<  led  from 

you,  or  di  fied,  to  answer  the  purp  inform- 

ants.    Whe$i  1  n  ^speech  to  the  people,  on  th  T  wjhilch 

you  have  q,uo  i' •  an  absurb  and  false   report,  I  was  :ted — uajL, 

almost   f        I  stand,  by  one  of  the  mi      '  "  loval" 

gentlemen  of   |  re — immaculately  "loye'      rw>w   a     ihen — who 

not   oni\  iled -what  I  said,  to  the  echo,  but   ;  i    me 

:  .  'U   I   had  finished.     Jt'wa  1    days 

afterward  •■  invited  ,me  to  join  a  company  he  v  daing,  to 

support  tl  itiei  i      My  poor  remarks,  on  i.nvd-- 

to,  we  ■"  .  e'mendous  cheering  by  crowds  ns, — 

"  Uuioft '.:  ofpre — .many  of  whom  are  ately 

"h-.y.'i  rbu    may  count  on  their   support  to  the  Ad- 

min;s  ■       o,  to  the 'overthrow  of  cv^ry  of  the 

Cons'ti  only  the  clause  which   secures  ••  th  ition 

of  con;  ■      ive  had  recent  access  to  an' autograph  subscription 

list  co  signatures  of  many  leading   mercantile  houses  of 

the  tnojjt  ional  and  uncompromising  u loyalty,"  and  now  in 


15 

the  very  bosom  of  the  true  faith,  with  yourself — wherein  they  attested 
the  sincerity  of  their  respect  for  the  motives  and  purposes  of  the 
authorities,  on  the  19th  of  April,  by  subscribing  amounts,  set  opp 
site  their  names,  for  the  purpose  of  purchasing  arms,  to  be  used  under 
the  direction  of  the  Board  of  Police.  I  dafe  Bay  the. list  will  be  given 
to  the  public  before  long.  It  was  probably  with  these  arms — for  there 
were  scarcely  any  others — that  the  Baltimore  American,  since  and 
now  the  organ  of  the  Government  here,  and  certainly  th< 
and  mould  of  "loyalty*'  among  us,  suggest'  nil, 

that   the   Northern   troops  should  be  met  *' beyond   the  limits  of  the 
city" — a  su'gg-estion,  however,  which  the  police  authorities  did  not  e 
ftt  to  adopt.      It  was  only  the  day  before  that  I  :r- 

nal,  in  its  afternoon  issue,  had  said — -in  Avoid-  similar  to  those  which 
'you  ascribe  to  me  oh  that   point — and  which,  with  Seine  unimportant* 
modification  of  language,  £  did  certainly  use — th  iloodofour 

citizens",  shed  in  our  .  is  an  irresistible  appeal  to  us.:  11  to  unite 

as  Marylanders."  The  appropriation  of  half  a  million  by  the  Mayor 
and   City  Council  of  Baltimore,  which  you  d<  hiture 

for  having  ratified',  w  :  spontancousb        '       effective  by 

a  voluntary  tender  of  the  whole  amount,  aa  a  loan,  <  n  the  part  of  the 
banks,  on  the  very  day^of  the  adoption  of  the  citjf  1  was 

present  at  the  Mayor's  office  on  that  day,  when  a  committee  of  bank 
officers,  as  "loyal"  as  yourself  or  General  Butler,. made  tender  of 
the  money  to  his  Honor,  and  I  well  remember  the  juhilanl  satisfaction 
which  the  chairman*  expressed  at  having  been  authorized  to  do  so. 
Nothing  are,  would  be  more  difficult   than  lonvince  ' 

all  the  worl  tlemen  to  whom  I  have  alluded,  that  they  did  what 

would  have  just.fied   th"  -;t  in  sending    th  'ort  War; 

instead  of  taking  counsel   with    them   and   theirs.  -s   done,  to 

suppre.-s  th'e  ••<;;  loyal  element."     Ycm,  ddubi 

specimen  of  elegiac  composition  which ' issued,  fr  I    IMcHehry, 

when  the  proprietor  of. the  American  was  torn  from  his  "sorrowing 
wife  and  daughters  "  and  shut  up  "in  a  depot  o\'  traitors"  for  a  i\:\y 
or  two  because  of  his  precipitate  attempt  to  sell  an 'account  of  the 
"grand  strategic  movement"  to  Harrison's  Laudin 

I  could  give,  you  a  host  of  other*  examples,  to  illustrate  the  public 
unanimity  which  I  have  described  as-existing  T.,.-*  nllnot  behMdcn 
much  longer  tinder  a  bushel,  I  imagine — but  [•presume  you  wi|J  be 
satisfied  with  a  single  additional  one.     Indeed,  I  d  i   uo    &  .  in 

examining  •  r  of  the  proceedings  in  Monument  Square  on  the 

lSUh  cJf  April,  you  could   have -been  withdrawn,   ;  observatjoi 

ascribed  to  so  humble  an  individual  as  myself,  fr  ;ech  of  your 

present  colleague,  then  his  Excellency,  Governor  Hicks,  upon  the  same 
occasion       K  you  had  taken  the  trouble,  you  ive  learned  how 

that  "  loyal  "  citizen  and  officer  then  and  there  declare  I  that  "  he  had 
had  three  conferences'  with  the.  Mayor,  and  they  h<.  upon  every  point 

presented  '  and  further  that  "As  was  a  Marylmder  md  would  sooner 
hive  his  right  arm  cat  off  than  raise  it  against  a  sist  r  Southern  State  /" 
I  am  sure  yon  muett  have  seen,  from  your  obvious  familiarity. with  the 
proceedings   of  the  Legislature,  that  in  his   opening    me?s  ge,  a  few 


1G 

days  after,  the  Governor  showed,  by  his  correspondence,  that  he  had 
remonstrated  against  the  sending  of  any  more  troops  through  Mary- 
land, and  had  protested  to  General  Butler  against  the  landing,  at 
Annapolis,  of  the  division  command. 'd  by  .that  person..  If  this,  and- 
what  I  have  said  before,  be  not  sufficient  to  satify  you  that  everybody 
ought  not  to  be  hanged  who  was  naturally  and  painfully  excited  by  the 
shedding  of  die  blood  of  our  people  in  our  streets,  and  by  the  bar- 
barous threats  of  Northern  presses  and  mobs,  and  who  desired  to  avert 
the  shedding  of  more  blood — let  it  at  all  events  furnish  you  with  a 
test  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  impartiality  in  the  use  of  his  supreme  preroga- 
tives. Consider  Governor  Hicks,  I  pray  you,  as  a  Senator  of  the 
United  Siates  with  his  right  arm* as  yet  unamputated,  and  Mr.  Crown 
and  myself— -who  vowed  no   limbs  to  the  surgeon — as   prisoners  just 

^  released  from  Fort  Warren,  after  fourteen  months  of  ruthless  cap- 
tivity.! 

Your  charge  that  the  members  of  the  Legislature  were  only  deterred 
by  fear  or  menace  of  popular  violence  from  adopting  such  measures 
as  they  deemed  expedient,  is  as  untrue  as  the  charge  already  refuted, 
that  the  election  of  the  Baltimore  delegation  was  the  result  of  illegal 

/pressure  upon  the  voters.  I  am  quite  sure  that  no  definite  threats  of 
popular  outrage  e\ver  reached  the  Legislature,  to  my  knowledge;  afid 
certainly  no  one  , ■  ttached  any.  importance  to  them,  if  they  were  made. 
There  were  some  foolish  talk,  among  a  few  excitable  people  at  Fred- 
erick, which  I  have  no  .doubt  there  were"  knaves  enough  to  .encourage; 
but  I  know  that  it  was  simply  laughed  a,t,  and  the  parties  who"  were 
guilty  of  it  knew  better  than  to  carry  it  beyond  the 'swagger  of  the 
bar-rooms.  The  "  Force  Bill,"  as  you  call  it,  was  not. passed,  simply 
hfcause  it.  wa's  both  inexpedient  and  at  variance  with  the  Constitution 
of  the  State,  in  the  judgment  of  the  .large  majority  of  the  members 
of  the  Legislature,  who  were  opposed  to  if.  If  we  had  deemed  rt 
otherwise,  we  should  not  have  hesitated  or  feared  to  pa-sit;  but, 
although  it  had  gone  to"  a  second  reading  in  the  Senate,  the  opposition 
to  it  on  the  part  of  the  members  of  the  House  became*  so  decided,  as 
soon  as  its  provisions  were  generally  canvassed,  thai  it  was  recommit- 
ted in  the  Senate, .and  died  in  committee.  Incver  knew  of  the  existence 
of  the  bill,  or  of  the  purpose  to  introduce  it,  until  after itjvas  printed 
arrd  had  passed  to  the  second  reading;  and  I  d.  not  believe  that  more 
than  one  or  two  members,  a  farthest,  of  the  Baltimore  delegation  were 
better  informed.  I  know  that  we  were  unanimously  opposed  to  it,  as 
soon  as  we  knew  w'hat  it  was. 

So  much  for  the  measures  which  we  did  not  pass,  and' which  you 
seem  to  consider-as  justifying  our  arrest,  quire  as  decidedly  as  those 
which  we  adopted.  _  For  these  last  I  have  no  apology  or  explanation 

"  to  make,  to  you  or  to  any  one.  I  have  reviewed  them  all,  carefully 
and  cal  sly,  and- am  ready  to  *tand  by  them  all.  Of'thj  position 
which  they  gave  to  the  State,  upon  the  great  questions  which  have 
-severed  the  Union,  I  am  proud,  as  in  my  last  letter  I  said  to  you. 
The  sad  experiences  of.  the  intermediate  time  have  given  them  a  sanc- 
tion and  a  confirmation,  which  no  candid  or  rational  man  can  dispute. 
Those  measures  constitute  the  whole  of  what,  as  a  Legislature,  we  did, 


1? 

/ 
or  thought  it  proper  and  practicable,  and  within  our  legitimate  sphere, 
to  do;  and  the  frank,  and  explicit  manner  in  which  our  conclusions  in 
regard  to  the  war,  its  causes,  conduct  and  consequences,  wers  pro- 
mulgated,  and  officially  communicated  to  the  government — oven  after 
the  armed  forces  of  the  United  States  had  fu  i  of  the  State, 

and  the  President  had  disregarded  the  hob  hs  corpus,  and  had  arrested' 
and  imprisoned  the  police  authorities  of  its  chief  city — would  have  satis- 
fied a  fairer  man  than  yourself,  that  it  was  a  libel  to  charge  "us  with 
"conspiring"  or  with  being  intimidate  I  fro. a  the  execu'i  >n  of  purposes 
which  we  entertained.  With  these  measures  and  recorded  opinions 
of  the  Legislature  before  the  world,  I  could  not  falsify,  if  I  would, 
the  position  which  we  occupied.  Nor  can  you.  We  believed  the  war 
to  be  unjust  and  unconstitutional — brought  about  by  the  'aggressions 
of  the  Northern  people  upon  the  rights  of  the  South.  We  believed 
the  restoration  of  the  Union,  by  force  of  arms,  to  be  a  cruel  absurdity 
and  an  impossibility,  and  '  d  and  implored  the  government  of 

the  United  States  to  give  us  peace,  upon  the  onh  terms  on  which  we 
believed  it  to  be  possible — the  recognition  of  Southern  independence. 
In  a  quarrel  in  which  We  believed  the  S  uth  to  have  the  right  on  its 
6ide,  our  sympathies  were,  of  course,  with  the  South,  and  they  wero 
stn  ngthened  by  habits,  ties,  associations,  and  common  institutions 
and  interests.  We  were  satisfied  that  the  troops  which  wjsre  passing 
through  the  State  to  Washington—  and  which  Mr.  Lincoln,  in  my 
hearing  and  that  of  his  Cabinet,  on  the  2ist  of  April,  1881,  solemhly 
declared  to  be  intended  only  for  4,thc  defense  of  the  capital,"  and  not 
for  invasion — were  meant  to  subjugate  the  Southern  States.  We  be- 
lieved that  they  were  destined,  sooner  or  later,  to  be  the  bearers  of  an 
emancipation  proclamation,  and  to  stir  up  servile  insurrection.  Wo 
regarded  them,  therefore,  as  Governor  Ilrcks  had  styled  them,  in  his 
letter  to  General  Butler,  as  "Northern  troops" — on  an  unlawful,  sec- 
tional and  unconstitutional  errand,  to  which  the  pretence  of  "restor- 
ing the  LTnion"  gave  no  sanction  in  our  eyes.  We  believed  the  people 
of  the  State  of  Maryland,  in  the  event  of  the  dissolution  of  the  Union, 
to  have  the  right  of  determining  to  which  of  the  two  sections  their 
feelings  and  interests  inclined  them,  and  we  had  no  doubt  that,  upon 
that  naked  Question,  three-fourths  of  them,  at  least,  would  seek  to 
join  their  destinies  with  those  of  the  South. 

These  opinions  we  had  the  unquestioned  right  to  entertain  and  to 
express,  and  we  did  eo.  Yo  will  find  them  all  proclaimed  in  the  re- 
ports and  resolutions  which  the  Legislature  adopted.  They  are  my 
deliberate  opinions,  still.  But  though  they  were  otijr  opinions,  we 
knew  and  felt  that  we  were  not  the  people  of  Maryland,  and  that  we 
had  no  right,  as  a  mere  legislative  body,  to  pass  an  ordinance  of  seces- 
sion, or  to  revolutionize  the  State,  or  to  alter  its  government,  or  to 
plunge  it  into  war,  of  our  own  motion.  These  things,  were  for  the 
people  themselves  to  determine  on,  and  to  do  or  to  leave  undone :  and 
I  solemnly  asseveiate  that  it  never  entered  into  the  plans  or  purposes 
or  contemplation  of  the  Legislature,  to  substitute  itsejf  for  the  peo- 
ple, in  these  regards,  or  to  "conspire"  to  do  so.  We  should  un- 
doubtedly have  placed  our  people  in  a  condition  to  defeud  themselves 


18 

and  the  State  against  lawless  aggressions  of  the  General  government, 

if  we  had  been  able  to  do  it.  This  was  our  duty,  and  it  was  the  con- 
stitutional light  of  the  people,  an  I  subsequent  suffering-?  and  wrongs 
hive  demonstrated  i  paramount  necessity.  If  we  could,  we  should, 
nd  all  peradvQi  ture,  have  prevented- the  snsppfessibn  of  the  tnunU 
cip.al  government  of  Baltimore  and  tjio  General, Assembly  of  the 
State,  and  the  sul  ion   of  a  military  commandant,  and   his  will, 

for  the  laws  and  Constitution  of  Maryland.  We  should  never  have 
permit  ed  the  illegal  arrests,  the  searches  and  seizures  without  oath, 
or  warrant,  which  have  trodden  out  the  fundamental  guaranties  of 
freedom  among  us.  We  should  not  have  tolerated  the  suspension  of 
the  habeas  corpus  at  Mr.  Lincoln's-  pleasure,  or, the  suppression  of  news- 
papers and  ice  speech,  or  have  allowed  a  judge  to  be  dfaggeel,  bleeds 
ing.,  from  the  bench,  as  in  the  case  of  Judge  Qarmiehael,  because  ho 
had  given  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution,  securing  the  liberty  of 
the  cjtizen,  in  charge  to  a  grand  jury.  Least  of  ;dl  would  we  ever 
have  consented  that  an  "election"  should  be  held  and  dire: ted  and 
consummated  iu  Maryland,  under  the  proclamation  of  a  General  of 
the  United  States  ar.my.     Of  all  this  you  may  rest  assured. 

Unhappily,  however,  we  Avere  powerless,  and  we  knew  and  felt 
it.  The  ptoplewere  unarmed  and  defenceless.  The  Governor  of  the 
State  was  a  reckless  partisan  who  subordinated  his  duties  to  his  pas- 
sions, and  had  no  greater  respect  for  his  State  or  himself,  than  to  per- 
mit-bne  of  his  official  proclamations  to  be  contemptuously  "counter- 
manded," through  the  newspapers,  by  a  recruiting  captain  of  United 
States  volunteers  in  Baltimore.  'We  could  have  nothing  to  hope  from 
such  an  Executive — his  "  right  arm"  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding. 
Being  less  unscrupulous  than  he,  we  would  not  invade  his  constitu- 
tional province,  and  withoutdoing  so  we  could  do  nothing  that  requir- 
ed Executive  co-operation.  .For  even  the  protection  of  our  people, 
therefore,  and  the  execution  of  our  laws,  and  the.passive  maintenance 
of  the  dignity  and  constitutional  rights  of  our  State  we  were  helpless. 
How  absurd  10  contemplate  us  as  in  an  aggressive  and  belligerent  at- 
titude towards  the  Government  and  armies  of  the  United  States  Your 
grave  attempt  to  set  up  the  doctrine  that  our  mere  legislative  proceed- 
ings— laws  passed  and  resolutions  adopted  by  us,  as  a  State  Leigisla- 
lature — were  "  overt  acts"  of  treason,  under  a  ruling  of  Chief  Justice 
Marshall's,  will  not  deceive  any  one  who  has  access  to  the  horn-book 
of  our  common  profession.  If  our  resolutions  wore  foolish — or  wick* 
ed,  as  you  would  have  it— they  were  still  merely  the  expression  of 
opinions.  If  our  laws  were  unconstitutional,  they  were  simply  void, 
and  the  peril  was  to  those  only  who  might  happen  to  act  under  them. 
Ydu  have  aided'in  passing  too  many  unconstitu  ional  laws,  yourself, 
for  anyone  to  doubt,  who  has  observed  your  public  career,  thi t  you 
are  altogether  aware  of  you*  impunity,  as  a  legislator,  in  doing  so. 

L  believe  I  have  answered  whatever  it  is  proper  I 'should  answer  in 
your  letter.  I  have  done  so,  necessarily  at  great  length  and  with 
muchinconvenience  to  myself,  in  view  of  my  health  and  occupation. 
I  have  only  answered  it  at  all,  because  I  felt  that  you  had  taken  an 
unfair  advantage   of  my  previous   letter,  and  I  did  not   chpose  yon 


19 

should  do  so  unnoticed.  The  cold  blooded  and  unmanly  comment 
which  you  make  on  my  reference  to  the  indignities  and  indecencies  of 
our  treatment,  as  prisoners,  would  have  deprived  you  of  any  right  to 
ft  reply,  as  a  matter  of  respect  to  you.  If  it  were  possible  that  tho 
Confederate  government  had  in  fact  dealt  as  brutally  with  prisoners, 
as  we  were,  at  times,  treated,  it  would  have  seemed  small  reason  why 
you  should  select  such  brutality  as  the  only  point  for  imitation.  You 
aio  abetter  judge,  however,  than  I  am,  of  the  views  of  your  political 
associates,  and  I  therefore  presume  you  to  speak  advisedly,  when  you 
indicate  that  the  Administration  revenges  upon  kidnapped  and  help- 
less citizens  of  the  United  Stater — who  have  nothing  to  rely  on  but  its 
sense  of  justice  and  humanity — tho  wrongs  which  it  professes  to  havo 
received  from  enemies  in  arms*. 

I  am,  Sir,  ^our  obedient  servant, 

S.  T.  WALLIS. 


ihz  -  2S75,  \ 


• 


Hollinger  Corp. 
pH8.5 


